A Blog for TANC Ministries

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on October 7, 2013

Paul’s Passing Thoughts TANC Publishing Under Construction Blog Talk Radio Andy Young

29 comments

29 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

freegracefull said, on June 22, 2013 at 9:43 AM

“In the first place, Calvinistic Christianity is nothing more and nothing less than biblical Christianity. It follows, then, that the future of Christianity itself is bound up in the fortunes of Calvinism”

There is no mixing of BIBLICAL Christianity with ANY contrivance of man. Biblical Christianity is NOT Calvinism, it is NOT Arminianism, it is NO “ISM” period. The gospel is the gospel and it is the ” POWER OF GOD” for those who believe it.

If Calvinism were Biblical Christianity it would have worked perfectly the first time around. The gospel and its power is the only thing that works perfectly on the human heart for salvation.

STOP WITH THE ISMS!!

LikeLike
David Mark said, on June 22, 2013 at 10:22 AM

Gary,

You are correct that the kind of Love in 1 Corinthians 13:13 needs to be emphasized. I didn’t see that in my former Pastor in his Law and Centered Methodology, which made it difficult for his flock to practice Love, on each other.

It is a not a coincidence that you mention the need to practice Love on each other, because God has been revealing that to me several times as well as forgiving. He has also revealed that if I had been more biblically literate, I would’ve had a better understanding of his Methodology. It was in fact a Methodology that held the congregation in bondage that lacked the kind of joy of knowing Christ, for the world to see.

I’m not sure if he was Young, Restless and Reformed or a Hyper-Calvinist because he refused to fully disclose his doctrine. The fact that he elected to have kids sent home at children’s Sunday School if they didn’t bring their parents, makes me think he may have been Hyper, because he was essentially denying access of the Gospel. This stunt ended Sunday School for kids, as kids were dropping off during his tenure.

I am humbled by your reprimand and I will continue to explore other passages in the Bible that emphasizes the Love we need to have for each other.

Calvinism has so many dialects and so many combination of “points” making it difficult to understand what a true Calvinist really believes. I think it is risky to embrace something that even the Calvinist fail to find a consensus of what they believe.

In Christ
David

LikeLike
- Gary said, on June 25, 2013 at 9:04 PM
  
  David,
  
  Can you explain to me your understanding of TULIP? I know what each letter stands for, but what is your understanding of what each letter teaches?
  Also, do you know how the 5 points of Calvinism came about?
  How would you describe your own personal doctrinal beliefs?
  What is your connection with Paul?
  
  Thanks,
  Gary
  
  LikeLike
  - paulspassingthoughts said, on June 25, 2013 at 9:30 PM
    
    Gary,
    
    I don’t know whether David will see your questions or not, but Frankly, If I have any connection with David, that would be none of your business. Secondly, all one needs to know about TULIP is the fact that total depravity also applies to the saints which means they are still under the law and not under grace according to Romans. Hence, Calvinists are still under law and unregenerate by biblical definition based on what they believe about law. Instead of coming here and testing people, and based on the gospel you believe, your time would be better spent looking after the status of your own soul.
    
    LikeLike
johnimmel said, on June 27, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Gary Marble said: “So many things that could be said about all these comments, . . .”

Indeed that is true. So many things could be said but the presumption that our comments stem from ignorance is not one of them.

Gary Mable said: “Have any of you ever sat down and in a loving friendly manner and sought to understand their position, or allowed them to understand yours?”

OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER… until I realized that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

At the end of the day Calvinists are not interested in love and affection. (This is the myth they hide behind while perpetrating all manner of destruction) They are moved first foremost and always by their commitment to orthodoxy.

Gary, here is a though. Check your premise . . .

Pretend for a minute that the conflict does NOT stem from subjectivism. And then pretend for a moment that the content of our doctrinal disagreement is not the product of our own self-inflicted blindness.

I know this is a tough thing to imagine because Calvinists ALWAYS assume that their intellectual superiority stands unique in the world.

(If I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard “… if you only understood what i really believe . . .” I would be a very rich man. )

We are NOT ignorant. We are very, very, very informed about the content of historic Calvinism—its intellectual pedigree going all the way back to Plato and the substance of its historic despotism from Geneva forward.

But speaking of ignorance …

Gary Mable said: “There are many godly Calvinists, and there are likely many godly men in your camp . . .”

While I know this wasn’t your point, this comment screams of doctrinal ignorance or intentional doctrinal manipulation. By Pervasive Depravity definition there is no such thing as a “Godly” Calvinist. If you are committed to the orthodox reformed tradition then NO man can lay claim to any Godliness. There is no action to which Man can claim as his own in any real sense. It is called the Objective Gospel Outside of Us (and a few dozen other names invented to obscure the fact that at no point, at any time, can man take upon himself ANY good EVER). So fundamentally all Calvinists (those clinging desperately to the Reformed construct are EVIL. And if you were at all consistent you should say thank you that i’s willing to point out the hard truth.

This would be consistent with the doctrine you are so sure WE misunderstand.

(If you care to check my math, take a fast look at Calvin’s institutes Chapter Three. He specifically calls the presumption of human good after the new birth Neo Pelagian and then take a hard look at the Heidelberg Disputation and then take a look at Luther’s Disputations against the Efficacy of Indulgences, and Augustine’s, City of God . . . John Owen, Sin and Temptation and…. and… there are plenty of resources.)

Our “disdain” is not based in ignorance. It is a fully based in the reality that the content of the doctrine is corrupt and those who take it seriously, those people who seek to follow the construct to its logical conclusions, (abeted by those who are passive in moral judgment) produce the same mystic despotism over and over and over.

The only way we are ever “ignorant of what Calvinists actually believe” is because individual Calvinists display an endless license to draw the lines of “Orthodoxy” pretty much where ever they want. And this is exactly what this paragraph illustrates.

Gary Mable said:” Let’s allow each person to define what he believes, rather than telling the other what he believes, then, and only then, should we speak in critique of their stated position. That is harder and requires research and listening to the finest representatives and interacting with the best they have to say, but love, truth and reason depend on it.”

First of all it is riotously funny to read a Calvinist make overtures to Truth and Reason. Maybe do a Google search on Luther and Calvin’s take on Reason just for kicks and giggles.

Second: Check your premise. Your finest minds are the ones teaching this stuff. They are not the ones hedging their bets under a sea of subjectivism.

And this leads nicely to my next point . . . The implicit subjectivism and pragmatism displayed above is what lets people evade pretty much any doctrine that PRODUCES any “behavior” they want to dismiss as an aberration.

What I find endlessly hilarious is that Calvinist are the FIRST people to condemn actions—and the person—BECAUSE of faulty doctrine. But when it is their doctrine called to account they start screaming “ad hominem argumentation, ad hominem argumentation” and pretend that action has NOTHING to do with the doctrine. This endless double standard lets them pretend that the full scope of the Reformed Tradition can never be called into question.

Gary Mable said: “We owe it to each other not to impugn bad motives on each other just because we interpret Scripture differently.

Actually no! We owe it to ourselves to condemn philosophical subjectivism with impunity. The insidious tide of modern pragmatism has so corrupted our will to condemn that which is evil that we are sucked into the vortex of “lukewarm debate.”

Evil is the only thing that wins when those holding all the cards in an objective conflict choose to allow subjectivism to make a claim to being “reasonable.” Calvinism is not REASONABLE and neither are those demand the right to subjective license so they can: ” . . . allow each person to define what he believes.”

I do not have a unity of mind or spirit with any man proclaiming the roots of the Reformed construct.

I am out to defeat the core of this ideology because it is the most destructive body of thought every perpetrated on human existence.

Further more it is a profound conceit to preach evil and then demand that I censor myself in the name of brotherly love.

I will not do it.

This is not one big misunderstanding where a few people are merely misled. The history and outworking of this doctrine is available for anyone who will actually look. And if you can LOOK and still cling to Reformation orthodoxy then we are not brothers. And your willful blindness exempts you from ever receiving my moral absolution.

I value my judgment, my values, my objective rational faculties far, far, far too much to let such disgusting pragmatism infect my life. And I exhort everyone to do the same.

Throw off the subjectivity and pragmatism that is foisted upon your unsuspecting souls by those staking a claim to reason and denounce evil for the evil it is.

LikeLike